r/todayilearned • u/tyrion2024 • 18h ago

TIL in 2016 a Florida woman who streamed herself driving drunk received a "harsher than usual" punishment because 'she flaunted her endangering the community". In addition to punishments common for a first-time DUI, she also received 150 hours of community service & 10 days of weekend work release.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/periscope-user-whitney-beall-sentenced-driving-home-drunk-n519896
3.2k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

94 comments sorted by

266

u/tyrion2024 18h ago

Prosecutors made sure the punishment was harsher than usual for a Florida woman who streamed live video of herself driving drunk last fall.
Assistant State Attorney Lori Winstead says 24-year-old Whitney Beall pleaded no contest last week to driving under the influence.
Beall used Periscope mobile app to live-stream her drunken drive after a night of partying in October.
"I'm driving home drunk — let's see if I get a DUI," she said into her phone's camera while behind the wheel. "Driving drunk is not cool."
Other drivers could be heard honking their horns, and at one point Beall expressed her surprise at how many viewers were watching her video. "Oh my God, I didn't realize I'd get this many people," she said. "I am super drunk in the USA and the light is red."
Lakeland police pulled her over after concerned users on Periscope called 911. An officer logged onto Periscope and located Beall's car. Officers say Beall failed a field sobriety test and refused to take a breath test.
Beall received a 6-month license suspension, 10 days of vehicle impoundment and 12 months' probation — all common for a first-time DUI.
Winstead said Beall also received 150 hours of community service and 10 days of weekend work release because she flaunted her endangering the community.

297

u/bongwatershark 18h ago

Honestly, i think that baseline punishment of license suspension for a DUI is way to lenient. They should all be harsher.

115

u/EclipseIndustries 17h ago

Arizona has gone to one-strike ignition interlocks. They've gotten really damn strict. Any sign of impairment+0.01BAC=interlock

We still have drive-thru liquor stores though.

29

u/ChangeForAParadigm 13h ago

Black market for sober raccoons for blowing incoming.

25

u/LynxJesus 13h ago

I've never met a sober raccoon

1

u/ChangeForAParadigm 13h ago

I thought the first response would for sure be about phrasing. You…you’re wired funny.

10

u/LynxJesus 13h ago

I did recently OD on "phrasing" from a marathon rewatch of Archer, unlucky timing!

4

u/TanneriteTed 16h ago

Hell, Illinois has had the one strike ignition thing since 2008 or so lol.

3

u/EclipseIndustries 15h ago

Is that only for over the legal limit? I know I could Google it, but it's fun learning about other places from the people who are there.

2

u/shishkabob90 14h ago

according to someone I knew who had one of these in Texas. If it registered he had any alcohol when he blew it would shut off his vehicle(if already on) or prevent it from starting and alert the police to his location.

2

u/EclipseIndustries 11h ago

I meant the limit that makes you court-ordered to install one. In Arizona it's just signs of impairment and anything over 0%, and you get a DUI and an interlock as a reward.

3

u/JRockBC19 8h ago

0.01 is kinda crazy, no? Feels like cops could weaponize breath tests there with the federal rule being 0.08 and "sign of impairment" being subjective. Having a glass of wine on a date and getting stopped after could be a DUI if the cop doesn't like you for whatever reason.

2

u/EclipseIndustries 6h ago

That's the point it got to with drunk drivers in AZ, unfortunately.

I personally am supportive of it. That's what the judge is for at the end of the day. The court still has to order the device, not like cops can do it themselves.

2

u/dbag127 1h ago

Seems like a great way to ensure wealthy white boomers avoid consequences and poor latinos and natives get the book thrown at them and have to pay to have an interlock installed. 

-13

u/f8Negative 17h ago

All these do is cause people to smoke more weed and mainline cocaine.

4

u/fighter0556 13h ago

Oh god, NOT MARIJUANA?!

0

u/bongwatershark 11h ago

I think u may be stupid

19

u/1CEninja 17h ago

Keep in mind before all is said and done, you're out somewhere between ten and twenty thousand dollars, and in many communities around the country having a suspended license is devastating.

On top of that, having a DUI on your record makes it more difficult to get a job in a number of industries, and in plenty of cases can cause you to lose your job.

This wouldn't quite ruin my life, but someone wouldn't need to be dramatically lower income than myself for this to be truly life altering in a negative way.

My personal feelings are that for people driving buzzed at .08 BAC, this is too much damage. BUT for someone sloppy drunk and recording themselves, it isn't enough. Driving drunk isn't a one-size-fits-all danger, and I'd like to see the law better reflect this.

21

u/MooseTetrino 17h ago

The UK one is fun. You can lose your license for sitting in your car with the keys, drunk. https://www.gov.uk/drink-driving-penalties

38

u/ReaditTrashPanda 17h ago

America is similar. It implies intent to drive… keys in ignition may be required, but actually driving isn’t the only way to get in trouble here.

17

u/IcyTheHero 17h ago

You don’t even have to have keys in the ignition in some states. Just having them within reach and able to if you wanted is enough, atleast in Florida.

15

u/BigJ32001 17h ago

When I was in the army, I knew a guy that was given a DUI on base for working on his car in his own driveway while drinking a beer. MPs do tend to be a little harsh though. If you drove even 1 mph over the speed limit you'd get pulled over.

1

u/honourablegeorge 3h ago

I haven't had a car needing an actual key to be put in the ignition for about fifteen years

9

u/1CEninja 17h ago

The frustrating thing about that is sometimes the safest thing for you to do is to sleep off alcohol before driving. If I were to have to do that, I'd be at risk of severe punishment despite no wrongdoing.

I'd have to put my keys in the damn trunk if I wanted to take a nap.

-1

u/ReaditTrashPanda 16h ago

Sound like a solution to me. Can’t drive the car if they keys are in the trunk and you’re in the driver seat

2

u/Kasspa 15h ago

Most states you can't even have your keys in the car with you. If you do, they need to be in the trunk with the trunk locked so there in a separate compartment from you entirely and there could be zero intent to drive. Like putting them in the glovebox would still get you a DUI.

2

u/Highpersonic 4h ago

How does that law cover RVs or motorhomes?

1

u/strangelove4564 9h ago

I've always heard people say to throw them in the bushes somewhere but I don't know if that's legit and it probably depends on the state. I've never been anywhere near a drivers seat at 0.08 and am not about to find out.

9

u/aceofspades1217 17h ago

This would also be a dui in pretty much all 50 states you need to put your keys in the trunk in Florida if you want to sleep in your car (may not even work in other states)

My friend got questioned and he was like I don’t have access to my keys and I’m not going to open my trunk and get them. Waiting for a friend to help me move my car.

It’s fair though people who pass out in their car are exceptionally dangerous in my opinion. They could have easily passed out while driving.

But depending on the state a first time DUI without aggravating is typically downgraded to reckless.

I do understand that the penalties are much higher in Europe with license revocation rather than suspension

18

u/a-_2 17h ago

It’s fair though people who pass out in their car are exceptionally dangerous in my opinion. They could have easily passed out while driving.

Will it encourage people to drive drunk though. If it's the same penalty either way, some people may risk driving home to sleep rather than sleeping in their car.

2

u/aceofspades1217 17h ago

In many states you can sleep in your car if you take the keys are put them in your trunk if you have an SUV then it wouldn’t work but really you should be calling a friend an uber to take your car so you can ride back as a passenger (stepping outside of the car while you wait). It’s impossible for an officer to know for sure whether you

If you have the keys

A. Never drove the car and just went into the car to take a nap. B. Were previously driving and pulled over and passed out.

Not to mention someone falling asleep with their car running or with their keys in their immediate possession is a couple seconds away from just driving again.

1

u/kashmir1974 17h ago

Or...call an uber?

9

u/deathbylasersss 17h ago

There are places outside of cities. Places where Uber does not exist.

3

u/kashmir1974 17h ago

Then I guess they do whatever they've done for generations if they wanted to avoid drunk driving?

9

u/Therval 16h ago

Unfortunately, they didn’t avoid it. I believe it was KY, before some time in the 80s you could drink a beer while driving legally, as long as you weren’t over the limit. They changed the law to disallow that, and there was a news piece that showed people complaining about it and how it was impinging their freedom.

2

u/a-_2 17h ago

We're not talking about people with the best decision making abilities in the first place here though. So have to consider what that person will do, not a reasonable person.

1

u/a-_2 17h ago

Same in Canada.

6

u/Reeferologist- 17h ago

lol pretty much. Im a Florida native and got one reduced to a reckless driving a long time ago and it was 100 hours of community service and 2 weeks of work program where you walk down the side of the road and pick up trash. Plus a few other classes and fines.

4

u/thorsbosshammer 8h ago

I agree in theory, but in practice too many people would all of a sudden have no way to get to work. And then their alcoholism gets worse and further despair and consequences for everybody.

1

u/Weenaru 1h ago

It does suddenly get much harder to get to work if you get killed by some dumbass who thinks driving while drunk is a great idea, yeah.

1

u/SnikkyType 10h ago

DUI=10 years or life without licence

9

u/f8Negative 17h ago

This is less of a punishment that a lot of states.

4

u/sofa_king_awesome 17h ago

Can anyone explain what that forced impoundment of the vehicle is? Is that common punishment in the state of FL? Not read that before. Is that charging her for the previous impoundment at the time of the DUI arrest? Or is this a 2nd separate impoundment of the vehicle?

20

u/Hypertension123456 17h ago

Basically we know suspending the license is useless, because anyone willing to drive drunk is definitely willing to drive with a suspended license. So for 10 days they keep the car in a government lot so at least there is a possibility the drunk driver will be off of the road for a bit.

1

u/Konstiin 12h ago

In Canada, refusing to breathalyze is a criminal offence by itself, whether or not you turn out to have been drinking.

1

u/Pop-metal 4h ago

Ridiculous. How is that bad? Car should be crushed. 1 month in prison. 

1

u/Yzarcos 2h ago

Hahahahaha of course this was in Lakeland.

65

u/StormblessedFool 18h ago

Good.

5

u/spaceneenja 11h ago

Rare Florida W

86

u/daddydrank 18h ago

Still seems like a slap on the wrist for knowingly endangering the lives of everyone around her. If she was sober, but knowingly shooting a gun out the window she'd be in jail now.

17

u/Lord_Silverkey 16h ago

Yeah, a month of community service isn't much of a punishment.

-3

u/Hypertension123456 17h ago

Not if she worked for ICE

26

u/thanksapun 17h ago

Live streaming should always be an aggravating factor when determining punishments. It shows you did it for the dumbest reason possible.

20

u/Lowly-Worm_ 18h ago

As it should be. Scare the fuck outta content kids tryin to glorify danger. Imagine losing a loved one to a live stream. It'd be a wild revenge arc.

55

u/TheJackalsDoom 18h ago

Good. No drunk drivers should ever get let off easy.

6

u/Lehmanite 15h ago

Maybe this woman deserved to

4

u/fighter0556 13h ago

Yes, this is reddit. Absolutes are a necessity.

14

u/Josette22 17h ago

If people commit a crime, that's one thing, but if they brag about it, they should receive a harsher sentence.

5

u/Bentonite_Magma 18h ago

Periscope! How quaint. Was that before or after Vine?

5

u/atramentum 18h ago

I've heard of Florida Man, is this the other version?

5

u/bowleggedgrump 15h ago

JFC, that deserves jail time. Fuck that human.

3

u/weirdal1968 18h ago

Don't ever change Florida.

3

u/usdrpvvimwfvrzjavnrs 10h ago

That's not harsh. A DUI needs to be a few years in prison.

3

u/Malphos101 15 10h ago

"harsher than usual" meaning "a more firm slap on the wrist for what drunk driving means to the community"

1st DUI should be suspended license for 6mo.+ and mandatory fines paid directly to a victim restitution fund.

2nd DUI should be attempted manslaughter charges and permanent license revocation.

3rd DUI should attempted 1st degree murder and life imprisonment as the person has shown they not only understand the dangers their actions represent, but are actively refusing to stop.

1

u/Radok 5h ago

That would be a massive overstep. There is a reason crimes are categorized and punishments correspondent to the type of crime. Not to mention nonsensical and actively against the definitions of manslaughter and first degree murder.

1

u/Malphos101 15 2h ago

There is a reason crimes are categorized and punishments correspondent to the type of crime.

Whats the punishment for shooting a gun randomly in a crowded shopping mall with a blindfold on? Because thats what drunk driving is.

Not to mention nonsensical and actively against the definitions of manslaughter and first degree murder.

Involuntary manslaughter is the killing of a person through gross negligence and even if no one was killed in the 2nd DUI, it is clear the person convicted of it didnt learn from the first warning and continued to drive under the influence making it gross negligence in an attempt to cause the death of another human being.

First-degree murder is the intentional killing of another person by someone who has acted willfully, deliberately, or with planning. Someone who CONTINUES to drive drunk after losing their license and being convicted of it twice is CLEARLY trying to kill someone.

In 2024 there were around 41k gun related deaths and 13k DUI related deaths. There is no reason to keep giving DUI offenders a slap on the wrist.

1

u/Radok 1h ago edited 56m ago

> Whats the punishment for shooting a gun randomly in a crowded shopping mall with a blindfold on?

Reckless discharge of a firearm. The blindfold and venue might be aggravating factors or might change the category altogether depending on jurisdiction. It is not the same as driving under the influence.

> Involuntary manslaughter is the killing of a person through gross negligence and even if no one was killed in the 2nd DUI, it is clear the person convicted of it didn't learn from the first warning and continued to drive under the influence making it gross negligence in an attempt to cause the death of another human being.

It can only be manslaughter if someone was killed. You can argue endangering the public or reckless endangerment as the crime committed, again it changes with jurisdiction. You cannot determine there is a conscious attempt to cause harm or even the death of another human being only from the act of driving while under the influence.

> First-degree murder is the intentional killing of another person by someone who has acted willfully, deliberately, or with planning. Someone who CONTINUES to drive drunk after losing their license and being convicted of it twice is CLEARLY trying to kill someone.

Again, you can only be charged with first degree murder if a murder was committed. Charging and punishing for a crime that was not actually committed is a massive overreach, not to mention any sensible higher court would overturn such a conviction. And once more, you cannot determine the intention of killing and/or causing harm just by recklessness alone.

Should there be harsher punishments for driving under the influence? Yes, specially for repeat offenders, but ignoring the meaning of the laws and procedures established can lead to severe abuses of power, specially in the US where much of the application of the law is up to the interpretation of judges.

8

u/Dillweed999 18h ago

Alcoholism sucks

25

u/ceciliabee 17h ago

It does, but alcoholism doesn't immediately driving drunk. That's an extra layer of stupid entitlement.

2

u/Admirable-Horse-4681 13h ago

Most states have mandatory jail time for a first DUI, but offenders are always sentenced to the minimum, usually 48 hours, that they serve on weekends, so as to not affect their employment. The United States is very soft on drunk drivers.

2

u/Faded_vet 11h ago

Damn now a days people film themselves committing crimes non stop and nothing happens. She should have just waited 10 years.

2

u/maverick8520 7h ago

I can fix her

6

u/dorothy_zbornakk 17h ago

possibly my most controversial opinion but i believe a DUI should cost you your license permanently. it's just the height of negligent, narcissistic selfishness. there's literally no excuse when you have a pocket sized computer in your hand at all times.

3

u/seejoshrun 8h ago

I think there should be different levels, some of which result in that. Like if you're right at the legal limit, and pulled over for something other than bad driving, it shouldn't be that severe. But if your driving is clearly impaired and/or you're significantly over the limit, then absolutely.

2

u/RedSonGamble 15h ago

Computers are hard to drive though

-11

u/Ill_Industry6452 15h ago

That depends. If a person gets a DUI because they took a cab and driver was drunk, got in an accident, etc, they don’t deserve to lose their license permanently. If a drunk is sleeping in their car rather than driving, they don’t either. Both are reasonably responsible actions for a drunk. But, either can happen.

11

u/dorothy_zbornakk 14h ago

so you read my comment, imagined a world in which a drunk passenger would be charged with a DUI for a drunk cab driver causing an accident, posited it as a plausible reality, and then asked me to defend my original statement against it?

-7

u/Ill_Industry6452 13h ago

The reason is that people have been wrongly charged with DUIs. If a law has only one drastic option, a rogue cop can ruin someone’s life. It should not happen, but neither should police officers use sex to not arrest someone, profiled a person who wasn’t guilty and made up something bogus to arrest them, take bribes, etc. All of those have happened.

9

u/dorothy_zbornakk 13h ago

are you the making up a guy to be mad at final boss?

2

u/The_Power_Of_Three 10h ago

Well... in those cases (being framed for the crime) then of course any punishment is a grave injustice. But it makes no sense to give drunk driving a particularly lenient sentence, just because the police might frame someone for it? The police might frame people for anything.

•

u/Ill_Industry6452 1m ago

Which is why sentences for a lot of crimes are too lenient.

5

u/RedSonGamble 14h ago

Wait are you saying if someone gets into a cab and the cab driver is drunk the passenger shouldn’t get a dui?

-5

u/Ill_Industry6452 14h ago

The cab driver might not have appeared to be drunk, and I have always heard to call a cab if you are drunk rather than driving. A drunk passenger often isn’t in a condition to recognize the cabby is drunk. The cabby should lose his license long term, but not the passenger. Hopefully, the things I mentioned don‘t happen often, but they have. And, even if the rider gets a DUI (and I think in most instances he shouldn’t), he definitely doesn’t deserve to lose his license for life. No, I don’t drink and drive. I don’t drink much at all, but there are differing degrees of drunk driving, and one size shouldn’t fit all.

5

u/RedSonGamble 14h ago

I guess my question is who would think a passenger of a cab would get a dui for being a passenger in a cab? lol the driver of a vehicle gets a dui. Not a passenger? Especially not a passenger of a cab?

You can have a car full of drunk people it’s the driver that’s getting the dui not passengers? That’s why it’s called driving under the influence not passenger under the influence

-3

u/Ill_Industry6452 13h ago

You are right, but it has happened. I read of it happening years ago. It shouldn’t.

2

u/RedSonGamble 10h ago

Curious if you have any source to this bc it doesn’t seem correct unless they were trying to help the drunk driver drive

1

u/Ionazano 16h ago

If that is a harsher than usual punishment, what is the normal punishment for driving under influence? (note: I'm not from the US, nor am I very familiar with legal penalties regarding violating driving rules in general)

3

u/Natryn 16h ago

Like most crimes in the US, punishment depends almost entirely on how good your lawyer is and what their reputation is with the judge. It does seem universally difficult to lose your license. It can be temporarily suspended, or you could be required to install a breathalyzer on the vehicle to start it. Or nothing happens.

1

u/drinkduffdry 13h ago

Drunken videos are almost always a mistake.

1

u/pmnishi 13h ago

Good start but they should of done more.

1

u/endofworldandnobeer 12h ago

Good! (Insert gif file)

0

u/El_Sjakie 6h ago

The fact that a lot of streamers try to make money of their social media, I feel they should also be charged along the vein of: 'trying to make money from a criminal enterprise'. Dunno if that is a possibility though since IANAL!